Saurashtra beat Bengal by nine wickets in Ranji final, clinch second title
Kolkata (PTI): Left-arm pacer Jaydev Unadkat returned a match haul of nine wickets, including 6/85 in the second innings, as Saurashtra thrashed Bengal by nine wickets in the summit clash to clinch their second Ranji Trophy title here on Sunday.
Having given away a big first innings lead of 230 runs, Bengal, who were overnight 169/4 in their second essay, folded for 241, handing the visitors a mere 12 runs target to win the final.
Saurashtra lost their opening batter Jay Gohil (0) off the bowling of Akash Deep but eventually went past the target, reaching 14 for 1 in 2.4 overs, to wrap up the match with one day and two full sessions to spare.
Saurashtra's earlier triumph was in 2019-20 season when they defeated Bengal on the basis of first innings lead. In the last 10 seasons, they have made the final on five occasions, underlining their consistency.
A Ranji Trophy title eluded Bengal yet again. Their first title had come in 1938-39 in the pre-independence era.
Earlier in the morning session, Unadkat showed the way after a freak run-out of Bengal batter Shahbaz Ahmed (27). The veteran Saurashtra skipper added four wickets to his overnight tally of two.
The old Bengal warhorse duo of skipper Manoj Tiwary (68) and Anustup Majumdar (61) slammed valiant half-centuries but the home side were let down by their top-order batters, including the promising Abhimanyu Easwaran who scored 0 and 16 in the two innings.
In-form No. 3 batter Sudip Gharami, who is fresh from a 112 and 41 in the semifinal against Madhya Pradesh and has 800-plus runs this season, also came a cropper and scored 0 and 14 in the two innings.
The decision to hand debut to Sumanta Gupta in a Ranji final also will rankle Bengal as he did not show any technique of a top-order batter and perished to an outgoing delivery.
State sports minister-cum-cricketer Tiwary had delayed his retirement to win a Ranji title from his fourth final, and it remains to be seen whether he continue to play in the upcoming season.
Earlier, the overnight duo of Tiwary and Shahbaz Ahmed committed hara-kiri while going for a third run. Ahmed had to sacrifice his wicket to give Saurahshtra their first breakthrough of the day.
It also unsettled Tiwary as he followed suit and got out for 68 after chasing a wide delivery from Unadkat.
In no time, Bengal were reduced to 205/9, still trailing by 25 runs.
But, Bengal's last pair of Mukesh Kumar and Ishan Porel avoided the ignominy of an innings defeat, scoring 36 runs in 37 balls to delay the inevitable.
Unadkat, who was released from the Indian Test side to play in the Ranji final, had bagged 3/44 in the Bengal first innings. He was ably supported by fellow left-arm pacer Chetan Sakariya (3/33) after they opted to bowl on a lively pitch.
Having prepared a green-top, Bengal were caught in their own web as their top-order batters showed complete lack of application on the opening day.
Brief Scores:
Bengal 174 and 241 in 70.4 overs (Manoj Tiwary 68, Anustup Majumdar 61; Jaydev Unadkat 6/85, Chetan Sakariya 3/76).
Saurashtra 404 and 14/1 in 2.4 overs.
Saurashtra won by nine wickets.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Bhojshala complex registered as 'mosque' in old revenue records: Muslim side to MP HC
Indore (PTI): The disputed Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque complex has historically been registered as a 'mosque' in revenue records and available sources don't clearly mention any Saraswati temple established by then-king Raja Bhoj, the Muslim side has told the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The Hindu community considers Bhojshala a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side calls the 11th-century monument Kamal Maula Mosque. The disputed complex located in Dhar district is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
During the hearing before the HC's Indore bench of Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi on Wednesday, Qazi Moinuddin questioned two PILs filed as intervenors in the Bhojshala case by an organisation named Hindu Front for Justice, one Kuldeep Tiwari and another individual.
Moinuddin claims to be a descendant of Sufi saint Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti and the 'Sajjadanashin' (spiritual head, guru, or successor of a Sufi shrine, khanqah, or religious site).
The PILs state that Bhojshala is actually a Saraswati temple and only Hindus should be granted the right to worship at the disputed complex.
Moinuddin's lawyer, Noor Ahmed Sheikh, claimed in the court that his client's ancestors, who are descendants of Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti, have historically held titles to the complex, and the site was also recorded as a "mosque" in government revenue records.
He contended that those associated with the management of the Kamal Maula Mosque, located within the complex, have been in "continuous and peaceful occupation" of the site for a long time.
Citing Muslim law, Sheikh argued that in the case of religious property, particularly a mosque or its related properties, officials such as the Sajjadanashin and Mutawalli (person entrusted with management, maintenance, and administration of a Waqf), and their descendants, not only have the right to intervene, but also have the right to manage and use such a structure.
Citing provisions of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904, the Muslim side's lawyer said the term "in-charge of the property" is used in this law, which makes it clear that the person or party who has been in charge of a property for a long time has rights over it.
During the hearing, Touseef Warsi, the lawyer representing the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society of Dhar, claimed that Hindu parties in both PILs had made "misleading representations" regarding historical facts before the high court.
He further claimed that available historical sources do not clearly mention the existence of a Saraswati temple established by Raja Bhoj, the legendary king of the Parmar dynasty who ruled Dhar from 1010 to 1055.
The ASI, a central government agency, has adopted three different positions in the lawsuits filed regarding the Bhojshala dispute, changing its answers from time to time, and this situation raises serious questions about judicial scrutiny of the complex, Warsi submitted.
He raised objections regarding the ASI's process of scientific survey of the Bhojshala complex, carried out on the HC order in 2024, and the method of videography and requested the court to examine these objections.
The hearing in the Bhojshala case will continue on Thursday.
The HC has been regularly hearing four petitions and one writ appeal since April 6, contesting the religious nature of the monument.
